In Re S Mulgaokar , AIR 1978 SC 717
>
0
Comments
.png "In Re S Mulgaokar , AIR 1978 SC 717") |
| In Re S Mulgaokar , AIR 1978 SC 717 |
In Re S. Mulgaokar, AIR 1978 SC 717
Citation: AIR 1978 SC 717
Bench:
The case was heard by a two-judge bench consisting of Justice M.H. Beg and Justice A.C. Gupta.
Facts:
Facts:
The case involved a senior advocate named Shri S. Mulgaokar, who was practicing in the Bombay High Court. In 1975, the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa received a complaint against him alleging professional misconduct. The Council referred the matter to the Disciplinary Committee for inquiry.
During the inquiry, it was found that Mulgaokar had taken an amount of Rs. 10,000 from his client, but had failed to account for the same. He had also suppressed the fact of receiving the amount from the client in his bill of fees. The Disciplinary Committee found Mulgaokar guilty of professional misconduct and recommended that his name be removed from the rolls of advocates for a period of three years.
Issue Raised:
During the inquiry, it was found that Mulgaokar had taken an amount of Rs. 10,000 from his client, but had failed to account for the same. He had also suppressed the fact of receiving the amount from the client in his bill of fees. The Disciplinary Committee found Mulgaokar guilty of professional misconduct and recommended that his name be removed from the rolls of advocates for a period of three years.
Issue Raised:
The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the findings of the Disciplinary Committee and the punishment recommended by it were appropriate in the case.
Provisions:
Provisions:
The case involved a violation of the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961, particularly Sections 35 and 36, which deal with professional misconduct by advocates and the punishment for such misconduct.
Judgment:
Judgment:
The Supreme Court upheld the findings of the Disciplinary Committee and the punishment recommended by it. The Court observed that Mulgaokar's conduct was unbecoming of a senior advocate and amounted to professional misconduct. The Court noted that advocates are officers of the court and have a duty to uphold the dignity and decorum of the legal profession. The Court held that the punishment of removing Mulgaokar's name from the rolls of advocates for a period of three years was appropriate in the circumstances of the case.
Opinion and Conclusion:
Opinion and Conclusion:
The Supreme Court's judgment in the case of In Re S Mulgaokar, AIR 1978 SC 717, reaffirmed the high standards of professional conduct expected of advocates. The Court emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability in the legal profession and stressed the need for advocates to maintain the dignity and decorum of the profession. The judgment serves as a reminder to advocates that any misconduct will not be tolerated and that they are accountable for their actions.
Thank you for Reading !
Post a Comment